Did Cooper Cronk take a dive?

[Slackboy72]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...r-dubious-no-try/story-e6frexnr-1226033664207

Kevin Moore's fury over dubious 'no try' •Josh Massoud
•From: The Daily Telegraph
•April 05, 2011 12:00AM


KEVIN Moore had a clear message for NRL referees boss Bill Harrigan last night.
"If Chris Ward is in the video referee's box next weekend, then Bill is not fair dinkum," the Bulldogs coach fumed.
Even the most novice league fan in the Victorian crowd would have understood Moore's angst over a Ward call to disallow the Bulldogs a try in the 29th minute.
A call the normally reserved Moore labelled "disgraceful".
Trailing 8-4 at the time and right in the contest, Canterbury looked to have claimed the lead when rookie centre Tim Lafai crossed after a right-hand sweep. But Ward flashed the red light after deciding that Melbourne's Cooper Cronk had been illegally obstructed by Bulldogs decoy Jake Foster in the lead-up.
Cronk, however, had eyes only for Foster and the Bulldogs gained no advantage from the gap his defensive misread created.
That referee Shayne Hayne missed a blatant forward pass that sent Lafai over was rough justice, but not enough to quell either Moore or Bulldogs skipper Andrew Ryan.
"I'm bemused," Moore said. "It was a disgraceful call in my opinion..
"Cooper [Cronk] made a decision to take a dive because he was out of position."
Although he maintained the try should never have been credited because of the forward pass, Bellamy sympathised with Moore and also agreed the decision turned the game markedly.
"I think they were unlucky with the obstruction call," Bellamy said.
"It was a pretty tough call. I could imagine Kevvy being pretty upset with that because it was a bit of a game turner."

I didn't see the game last night so I have no valid opinion on this. I'm always a little dubious when a dog cries foul but does this statement have any merit?

 

[Mig2006]

Yes - dive he did.....

 

[imasharkie]

The replays I saw, a try should have been awarded.
There was a try exactly the same in our game against the Warriors which was awarded.
Ward obviously played God in the decision and decided there was a forward pass and he made the call to award NO TRY.
I agree with Moore...send Ward packing. His decision was a blight on the game.

 

[gronkathon]

50/50. Cronks eyes never left the ball and the decoy was dumb enough to go the shove as well as running the line.

 

[ouwet]

The decision cannot be changed now... Let's move on! No need for a thread about it.

 

[cleary89]

He got bumped. But I thought he had been shot.

 

[skeepe]

It was Nathan Smith-like.

 

[Tom155]

yes he took a massive dive

 

[Timmah]

Absolutely. But our attitude after that decision was pathetic, cost us the game.

 

[BunniesMan]

Lol typical Storm scum. No wonder a decent bloke like Inglis left. Yes winning is great and they seem to be doing it again. But winning without dignity is no fun and someone with some backbone like Inglis couldn't stand it and had to leave for a club with some self-respect who don't do that sort of thing.

 

[Manly Mick]

A perfect 10 from all judges, was a forward pass, so correct result in the end, although 2 wrongs don't make a right

 

[DC_fan]

A perfect 10 from all judges, was a forward pass, so correct result in the end, although 2 wrongs don't make a right

I am surprised its taken a Manly fan to come up with the real reason why the try was not allowed.

Even though it was a night game, for me it was as clear as daylight that the pass was forward. The video ref picked it up on the forward pass. Obviously he can't rule on forward passes but took his chance at disallowing it for another reason.

 

[DJShaksta]

Lol typical Storm scum. No wonder a decent bloke like Inglis left. Yes winning is great and they seem to be doing it again. But winning without dignity is no fun and someone with some backbone like Inglis couldn't stand it and had to leave for a club with some self-respect who don't do that sort of thing.

Nah mate not my boat.

It's raining, don't think the planes are flying.


Yeah, Inglis - so much dignity and backbone.

 

[Packy]

If we start on forward passes can we go to Billy Slaters pass that led to a try? Or perhaps Cameron Smiths flurry of flat passes that happen every week.

Regardless. He wasn't asked to referee the pass, merely the obstruction. In that regards, Cronk was hit by the sniper.

 

[ByRd]

I am surprised its taken a Manly fan to come up with the real reason why the try was not allowed.

Even though it was a night game, for me it was as clear as daylight that the pass was forward. The video ref picked it up on the forward pass. Obviously he can't rule on forward passes but took his chance at disallowing it for another reason.

Well if that was the vid refs reasoning, it makes him even stupider. A forward pass just leads to a scrum on their line whereas the penalty they got gave them a leg up the field and they scored from the resulting set. We didnt deserve to win cause our heads dropped after that and they were all over us but if we are going to talk about forward passes, the Storm threw about 10 during the game but nothing was said.

 

[Perth Red]

Karma, the pass would have made any NFL 1/4back proud! The fact 4 officials couldn't see a blatant forward pass is the real tragedy!

 

[Tommy Smith]

If the decoy runner had run through the hole and not into Cronk there wouldn't have been a problem. Cronk didn't take the wrong man, he wasn't even looking when the Dogs decoy runner crashed into him.

Granted he still made a meal of it, but i can see why the video ref gave it a no try. Had Cronk not been interfered with then perhaps he would have slid in defense which would have closed the gap.

When a player makes the wrong decision to tackle the decoy runner then i dont have a problem. But that clearly wasnt the case on this occasion as he still had eyes on the ball player when he was taken out.

50/50 call IMO. Hardly the joke the Dogs are making it out to be.

 

[Timmah]

The replays I watched showed Cronk making contact with Payne, not the other way around. Payne wasn't aiming at Cronk.

 

[Tommy Smith]

The replays I watched showed Cronk making contact with Payne, not the other way around. Payne wasn't aiming at Cronk.

LOL You should do stand-up comedy.

 

[Danish]

Personally I think it was the correct call.

Offside players have no business interfering with defenders and as far as I'm concerned any and all contact made is their fault as they shouldn't be there in te first place.

It's similar to a defender getting pinged for knocking down an attacker without the ball. Regardless of if they were in a position to receive the ball, it is always a penalty (as it should be). So it's only fair that any decoy runner taking out a defender should be pinged, regardless of if that defender made a "bad read" or had no chance of making a tackle.

Rules need to be black and white in order to gain any consistency in this area. Asking video refs to decide if someone could have stayed on their feet, where his attention was or to judge his chances of getting across in cover is stupid IMO